The three sons of Benjamin: Bela, Becher, and Jediael.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
šə·lō·šāh bin·yā·min be·la‘ wā·ḇe·ḵer wî·ḏî·‘ă·’êl
The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
The Descendants of Benjamin
1 Chronicles 7:6–12 — The Descendants of Benjamin. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
The three sons of Benjamin: Bela, Becher, and Jediael.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
šə·lō·šāh bin·yā·min be·la‘ wā·ḇe·ḵer wî·ḏî·‘ă·’êl
The sons of Bela: Ezbon, Uzzi, Uzziel, Jerimoth, and Iri, heads of their families—five in all. There were 22,034 mighty men of valor listed in their genealogies.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ū·ḇə·nê ḇe·la‘ ’eṣ·bō·wn wə·‘uz·zî wə·‘uz·zî·’êl wî·rî·mō·wṯ wə·‘î·rî rā·šê ’ā·ḇō·wṯ bêṯ ḥă·miš·šāh ‘eś·rîm ū·šə·na·yim ’e·lep̄ ū·šə·lō·šîm wə·’ar·bā·‘āh gib·bō·w·rê ḥă·yā·lîm wə·hiṯ·yaḥ·śām
The sons of Becher: Zemirah, Joash, Eliezer, Elioenai, Omri, Jeremoth, Abijah, Anathoth, and Alemeth; all these were Becher’s sons.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ū·ḇə·nê ḇe·ḵer zə·mî·rāh wə·yō·w·‘āš we·’ĕ·lî·‘e·zer wə·’el·yō·w·‘ê·nay wə·‘ā·mə·rî wî·rê·mō·wṯ wa·’ă·ḇî·yāh wa·‘ă·nā·ṯō·wṯ wə·‘ā·lā·meṯ kāl- ’êl·leh ḇā·ḵer bə·nê-
Their genealogies were recorded according to the heads of their families—20,200 mighty men of valor.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lə·ṯō·lə·ḏō·w·ṯām wə·hiṯ·yaḥ·śām rā·šê ’ă·ḇō·w·ṯām bêṯ ‘eś·rîm ’e·lep̄ ū·mā·ṯā·yim gib·bō·w·rê ḥā·yil
The son of Jediael: Bilhan. The sons of Bilhan: Jeush, Benjamin, Ehud, Chenaanah, Zethan, Tarshish, and Ahishahar.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ū·ḇə·nê yə·ḏî·‘ă·’êl bil·hān ū·ḇə·nê ḇil·hān yə·ʿīš ū·ḇin·yā·min wə·’ê·hūḏ ū·ḵə·na·‘ă·nāh wə·zê·ṯān wə·ṯar·šîš wa·’ă·ḥî·šā·ḥar
All these sons of Jediael were heads of their families, mighty men of valor; there were 17,200 fit for battle.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
kāl- ’êl·leh bə·nê yə·ḏî·‘ă·’êl lə·rā·šê hā·’ā·ḇō·wṯ gib·bō·w·rê ḥă·yā·lîm šiḇ·‘āh- ‘ā·śār ’e·lep̄ ū·mā·ṯa·yim yō·ṣə·’ê ṣā·ḇā lam·mil·ḥā·māh
The Shuppites and Huppites were descendants of Ir, and the Hushites were descendants of Aher.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·šup·pim wə·ḥup·pim bə·nê ‘îr ḥu·šim bə·nê ’a·ḥêr
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
The unit begins with a defect. Hebrew v. 6 opens בִּנְיָמִ֗ן with no construct bnê before it, and Ellicott says why: the word "has been lost, because Benjamin in Hebrew begins with the same three letters." Cambridge calls it an error of transcription. BSB brackets the supplied "[sons]" and lets the reader see the seam. ⚙ It is worth stopping there before the names begin. This is a book about keeping records, and its Benjamite record opens with a scribe's eye slipping. The Chronicler does not repair it. Three sons are then counted where Genesis 46:21 has ten and 1 Chronicles 8:1 five; Benson and Poole give the same pair of explanations, that these were "most eminent" or that "the other families were now extinct," and JFB add the wars of Judges 20. Barnes goes further and calls Jediael "perhaps a later chieftain," so that "son" would mean only descendant. Ellicott's own summary of the method is the sharpest line in the brief: the chronicler "has faithfully followed or rather transcribed his sources, without a thought of harmonising their apparent inconsistencies."
Cambridge makes the unit's one openly theological claim: the three names come from Genesis 46:21, with Jediael, "Known to God," substituted for the name Cambridge calls heathen-sounding, Ashbel, which he equates with Ishbaal, Man of Baal, and "The Chronicler in this case conforms literally to the principle laid down in Hosea 2:17," where the names of the Baals are taken out of Israel's mouth. K&D, working only from the lists, call the identification with Ashbel "very probable" but refuse certainty; Geneva simply glosses Jediael as "Also called Ashbel." ⚙ Two things should be said honestly. The identification is well attested across the commentators. The motive is Cambridge's reconstruction: no verse says the Chronicler renamed anyone. But if Cambridge is right, this genealogy is doing something more than bookkeeping. It is refusing to let a Baal name stand in Israel's register, and replacing it with a name that says the man's security lies in being known by God rather than in being known by anyone.
The body of the pericope is a formula run three times: names, a tally, וְהִתְיַחְשָׂם (Hitpael of yâchas, to have oneself enrolled by pedigree), and a count of גִּבּוֹרֵי חֲיָלִים. K&D refuse to read the five "sons of Bela" as literal sons: they are "more distant descendants, who, at the time when this register was made up, were heads of the five groups of related households." Benson, Poole and Barnes agree, and Barnes ties it to a date, "the chief men of the family at the time of David's census." Ellicott says the same of Bela's list and adds that "the names before us represent the chieftains and clans of Bela as they existed at a given epoch." Poole notices the human cost of that compression: the intervening fathers are left out "because they were obscure persons, as their sons are mentioned for their eminency." ⚙ That is a genealogy admitting that it is selective. The arithmetic admits something too. 22,034 plus 20,200 plus 17,200 is 59,434, which Cambridge and K&D both print; Ellicott prints 54,434 and Gill 59,430. K&D use the total as an argument: at Numbers 26:41 all Benjamin numbered 45,600, and Judges 20:47 left the tribe six hundred men, so these figures "point unquestionably to post-Mosaic times." The register is not a snapshot of the patriarchal family. It is the measure of a tribe that was nearly wiped out and came back.
Becher's nine houses are recorded nowhere else in Scripture; Ellicott says so flatly. Two of the nine, Anathoth and Alemeth, are towns: Ellicott and Cambridge both point to the Levitical towns of 1 Chronicles 6:60, and K&D state the principle, that "the cities received their names from the heads of the families which inhabited them." Gill reports Kimchi to the same effect and names Anathoth "the native place of Jeremiah the prophet." In Jediael's branch the names lean the other way, outward: Ellicott reads Bilhan against 1 Chronicles 1:42, "a son of Seir. Perhaps an Edomite element in Benjamin," and Pulpit says Bilhan, Jeush and Bela are all "of Edomitish origin." Chenaanah is the feminine of Canaan, which Ellicott thinks may mark "a Canaanite house which had amalgamated with the bnê Jediael" and K&D say need not. Tarshish is a Phoenician port and a gem. ⚙ The register that looked like a wall around a bloodline turns out to be full of doors. The Chronicler writes the foreign-sounding names down without a word of apology.
The last verse has no verb and no agreement among its readers. K&D begin "1 Chronicles 7:12 is unintelligible to us" and call the second clause "utterly enigmatical." The dispute is over אַחֵֽר׃, which Ellicott notes "happens to mean another." JFB report that "some eminent critics" read it as a common noun, "and Hushim, another son," and add the strongest piece of evidence: Hushim is Dan's son at Genesis 46:23, v. 13 here ends "the sons of Bilhah," the mother of Dan and Naphtali, and Dan is never named in the chapter. Poole marshals four arguments for the Dan reading, including the rabbinic idiom in which "another thing" names what is too loathsome to say aloud. Ellicott answers point by point: Numbers 26:42 calls Dan's offspring Shuham, not Hushim; Zebulun is omitted here as well; and "the chronicler's dislike of the tribe of Dan is probably an unfounded supposition." Cambridge takes a quieter line, that a copyist found the word Dan illegible. Gill decides Hushim "rather seems to belong to Benjamin." ⚙ We do not resolve it, and we note that Henry, writing on the chapter as a whole, had already drawn the conclusion the Dan reading makes explicit: "Dan is omitted, Re 7. Men become abominable when they forsake the worship of the true God, for any creature object."
⚙ This is a fallible reading, offered to be tested against the text. Fifty-nine thousand four hundred and thirty-four men are counted here and not one of them speaks. The pericope has no narrative, no miracle, no oracle. What it has is a procedure: wə·hiṯ·yaḥ·śām, they had themselves enrolled, repeated at the close of each house. The reflexive stem matters. These men came forward and gave their names. Read this chapter next to Ezra 2:62 and Nehemiah 7:64, where men who sought their register and could not find it were put out of the priesthood as unclean, and the dry list turns into something with stakes in it: to be written down is to belong, to be missing is to be excluded. And then read it with the seams left in, as the Chronicler left them. The first word of the Benjamite section has fallen out. The count is three where Genesis says ten. Becher's twenty thousand are nowhere else in Scripture. The last verse may be quietly carrying the tribe whose name the chapter will not say. This is a register that does not work. ⚙ Our reading is that the Chronicler's refusal to fix it is the point he is making. If belonging rested on the accuracy of the document, Benjamin would be in trouble on this page. Cambridge's suggestion about the substituted name sharpens it: the son whose name honoured Baal is entered as Jediael, Known to God. The register may be broken; the knowing is not. Every worry a reader can raise about these lists, that they contradict each other, that a name has dropped out, that a whole tribe is missing, is a worry about whether the record can bear the weight of a person's standing. Chronicles answers by handing us the flawed record and going on counting. We hold this loosely: it is an inference about the Chronicler's purpose, and the text does not state it.
Not Scripture, and not a verse: an editorial line only. The register is damaged and the Chronicler will not repair it, because what secures a name here is being known, not being legible.
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
The Verifier's strongest match for this unit is Genesis 46:21, the seventy who went down into Egypt, where Benjamin's sons are listed ten deep. Bela and Becher stand at the head of that list exactly as they do here, and Cambridge states the relation directly: "These three names come from Genesis 46:21." The third name differs, Ashbel there and Jediael here, which is the whole crux of v. 6. ⚙ The link is textual, not merely thematic: the Chronicler is working from the Genesis roll, and every commentator in the brief, Ellicott, Benson, Barnes, JFB, Poole, Gill, Geneva, Cambridge, Pulpit and K&D alike, reads the two passages against each other.
Genesis 46:21
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H1071 Beker (in 4 vv, rare) and H1106 Belaʻ (in 14 vv, rare), plus H1144 Binyâmîyn (in 160 vv). Two rare proper-name lexemes shared in the same order supports a genuine verbal dependence on the Genesis list; Cambridge names the dependence explicitly. No quotation formula is claimed.
Two of Becher's nine sons carry names that are also Benjamite Levitical towns. Ellicott notes that Anathoth and Alameth, as he spells it, "were Levitical towns in Benjamin" and cites 1 Chronicles 6:60; Cambridge cites the same verse and Jeremiah 1:1; K&D generalise the mechanism, that the cities "received their names from the heads of the families which inhabited them." ⚙ If that is right, one entry in this list is the origin of the village where Jeremiah was born, and of the field Jeremiah later bought there as a sign that exiles would come home (Jeremiah 32:7-9). A name in a census became a place on a map became the setting of a prophecy.
1 Chronicles 6:60 · Jeremiah 1:1
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H5964 ʻÂlemeth (in 4 vv, rare) with 1 Chronicles 6:60, alongside H1144 Binyâmîyn and H7969 shâlôwsh. The Jeremiah 1:1 leg has no Verifier-computed shared-lexeme basis in this unit and rests on the named citations of Cambridge, Ellicott and K&D, who all point to Anathoth (H6068).
The Verifier's second-ranked candidate is 1 Chronicles 7:15, which shares both rare names of v. 12. That match is exactly the one K&D warn against: they argue that "the peculiar forms of those names" here "seem to have arisen from an improper comparison of them with" the pair in v. 15, "in which the fact was overlooked that the Huppim and Shuppim of 1 Chronicles 7:15 belong to the Manassites." ⚙ So the lexical link is real and the historical link is probably an error, possibly an ancient one lodged in the text. Ellicott instead traces this house through Genesis 46:21 (Muppim, which he calls "a mere slip of the pen"), Numbers 26:39 (Shephupham and Hupham) and 1 Chronicles 8:5 (Shephuphan and Huram, the last of which he judges to be a scribe's error for Hupham). We flag the pairing rather than assert it.
1 Chronicles 7:15 · Numbers 26:39
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H8206 Shuppîym (in 3 vv) and H2650 Chuppîym (in 3 vv), both rare, with 1 Chronicles 7:15. Flagged because K&D hold that the 7:15 pair are Manassites and that the resemblance may itself be a transmission error, so the shared lexemes do not establish a shared referent. Numbers 26:39 is carried on Ellicott's and Gill's named equation of Shupham and Hupham with these names, not on a Verifier basis.
Jediael occurs in only six verses of the Hebrew Bible, and half of them are David's men: Jediael son of Shimri among the mighty men (1 Chronicles 11:45), the Manassite captain who deserted to David at Ziklag (1 Chronicles 12:20), and Jediael the Korahite gatekeeper (1 Chronicles 26:2). ⚙ These are not the same person as Benjamin's son, and we make no claim that they are. What the shared rare lexeme shows is narrower and still worth seeing: a name meaning "Known to God" clusters in the Chronicler's own material about David's establishment, which is consistent with Cambridge's reading of v. 6, that the Chronicler favours names confessing the God of Israel.
1 Chronicles 11:45 · 1 Chronicles 12:20 · 1 Chronicles 26:2
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H3043 Yᵉdîyʻăʼêl (in 6 vv, rare) with all three references. Deliberately tiered structural rather than verbal because the shared lexeme is a personal name borne by different individuals; the link is onomastic and thematic, not referential.
Numbers 26:35 places a Becher and his clan the Bachrites in Ephraim, not Benjamin. Barnes builds a whole reconstruction on it: Becher "or his heir, married an Ephraimite heiress," so his house "passed over in a certain sense into the tribe of Ephraim," retaining a place here "because, by right of blood, he really belonged to Benjamin." Pulpit follows the same line and credits the discussion to Lord A. C. Hervey. K&D reject it and argue instead that Becher's descendants were simply too few to form a clan in Moses' day and multiplied afterwards into the nine houses and 20,200 men of vv. 8 and 9. ⚙ The two accounts cannot both be right, and the verse does not decide between them.
Numbers 26:35 · 1 Chronicles 8:1
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H1071 Beker (in 4 vv, rare) with Numbers 26:35. Tiered structural rather than verbal by deliberate under-claim: the lexeme is genuinely rare and genuinely shared, but whether the Ephraimite Becher is the Benjamite Becher is a conjecture Barnes labels as such and K&D reject. 1 Chronicles 8:1 is named by Benson, Poole, Gill and K&D and carries no computed lexeme basis here.
Dan is absent from 1 Chronicles 7, and v. 12 is where that absence becomes audible: Hushim is Dan's only son at Genesis 46:23, and the very next verse of this chapter closes with "the sons of Bilhah," Dan's mother. Poole gives four arguments that aher here means "another," a coded Dan; JFB call the coincidence a presumption in favour of that rendering; Cambridge suspects an illegible manuscript; Ellicott gives three counter-considerations, among them that Zebulun is missing too. Henry, on the chapter as a whole, connects the silence to Judges 18 and to Revelation 7, where Dan is likewise not sealed. ⚙ We tier this low on purpose: the Revelation link is cross-Testament and rests on an omission in both lists, which is an argument from silence twice over.
Genesis 46:23 · Judges 18:30 · Revelation 7:5-8
basis: No Verifier-computed shared-lexeme basis exists for any of these pairs in this unit, and the Revelation leg is Greek against Hebrew, so a verbal tier is impossible in principle. The whole link rests on a contested reading of H313 ʼAchêr as the common noun "another" (asserted by Poole and reported by JFB, Cambridge and Ellicott, and rejected by Ellicott and K&D) plus Henry's association of the Judges 18 idolatry with the omission in Revelation 7. Provenance genuinely disputed; recorded as flagged.
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
Cambridge's reading of v. 6 is that Jediael, "Known to God," stands in the register where Ashbel, "Man of Baal," stood, and that the Chronicler is enacting Hosea 2:17, the taking of the names of the Baals out of Israel's mouth. ⚙ Our extension is this. The New Testament ends the same movement: to the one who overcomes is given a white stone "and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it" (Revelation 2:17), and his name is not blotted out of the book of life but confessed before the Father (Revelation 3:5). Paul reverses the ordinary direction of knowing in the same terms: "now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God" (Galatians 4:9), and "if any man love God, the same is known of him" (1 Corinthians 8:3). A Benjamite entry whose whole name means known to God is the small Old Testament shape of the thing the gospel makes large: the register that saves is the one God keeps, and the name that counts is the one he gives. Marked novel: Cambridge supplies the Hosea link and the etymology, and the Christward extension is ours.
Hosea 2:17 · Revelation 2:17 · Revelation 3:5 · Galatians 4:9
The verb that closes each of the three Benjamite houses is וְהִתְיַחְשָׂם, the Hitpael of yâchas: they had themselves enrolled by pedigree. It is nearly a technical term of the restoration community, and Ezra 2:62 and Nehemiah 7:64 show its edge, where priests who sought their register and could not find it were excluded from the priesthood. ⚙ The New Testament takes up exactly that anxiety and answers it with a different register. The seventy return elated and are told to rejoice instead "because your names are written in heaven" (Luke 10:20); Paul names his fellow workers "whose names are in the book of life" (Philippians 4:3); the Hebrews are told they have come to "the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven" (Hebrews 12:23). The structure is the same in both Testaments, an enrolment that establishes who belongs, and the difference is who holds the book. Marked novel as a reading of this pericope: none of the commentators in the brief draws the line, and the connection is one of shared institution and vocabulary, not of quotation.
Ezra 2:62 · Luke 10:20 · Philippians 4:3 · Hebrews 12:23
Ellicott and Cambridge both read the totals of this unit against Judges 20:47, where the whole tribe was reduced to six hundred men hiding at the rock of Rimmon. K&D make the same point from the arithmetic: 45,600 at Numbers 26:41, then near annihilation, then 59,434 here. ⚙ The redemptive-historical line runs from that near extinction through this muster roll: the tribe that survived it gave Israel its first king, and after that king's house fell, gave the church the apostle who introduced himself as "of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin" (Philippians 3:5) and who argued from his own pedigree that God had not cast away his people (Romans 11:1). The 17,200 "going out in host to the battle" of v. 11 are the ancestors of a man whose warfare was of another kind (2 Corinthians 10:3-4). Marked novel: the survival of Benjamin after Judges 20 is the sourced observation of Ellicott, Cambridge and K&D, while the line drawn from this census to Paul is ours and rests on no commentator in the brief.
Judges 20:47 · Philippians 3:5 · Romans 11:1
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
Text. The Hebrew of v. 6 lacks the construct bnê that the syntax requires; Ellicott and Cambridge both explain it as haplography before בִּנְיָמִ֗ן, and BSB brackets the supplied "[sons]." At v. 10 the written and read forms of Jeush differ, which Ellicott records as "So Heb., margin. Text, Jeish." Verse 12 is the hardest in the unit; K&D's own verdict is that it "is unintelligible to us."
Numbers. The three totals in this unit (22,034, 20,200, 17,200) sum to 59,434. Cambridge and K&D print that figure. Ellicott prints 54,434 in his note on v. 11 and Gill prints 59,430; both figures are reproduced from the printed commentaries without correction, and both differ from the sum of the verses as they stand. Whether ʼeleph (H505) in such musters always denotes a literal thousand rather than a clan or contingent is a standing question in Old Testament study; the brief takes no position and neither do we.
Sources. Every quotation is a contiguous verbatim span from the public-domain commentaries named by tag, resolved from the brief by code rather than retyped. Ellicott, Cambridge, K&D, JFB, Poole, Gill and Pulpit carry the exegetical weight here; Henry's note is a comment on the whole chapter and is labelled as such where it is used; Geneva contributes only a marginal gloss; Benson and Poole are near-identical on v. 6, which is a known dependence between those two works. Pulpit's "us well" at v. 10 is a typographical error in the printed text and is reproduced rather than corrected.
What is uncertain. A great deal, and we have not hidden it. Whether Jediael is Ashbel renamed (Cambridge and Geneva yes, K&D probable, Barnes a later chieftain). Whether the Ehud of v. 10 is the judge of Judges 3:15 (Gill yes, K&D and Ellicott no). Whether Becher's house passed into Ephraim (Barnes and Pulpit yes, K&D no). Whether aher in v. 12 is a name or the common noun "another" concealing Dan (Poole, JFB and Cambridge lean yes, Ellicott and K&D no, Gill no). Whether the Bilhan and Jeush of v. 10 mark Edomite blood inside Benjamin (Ellicott "perhaps," Pulpit yes). The Chronicler preserved sources he did not harmonise, as Ellicott observes; our synthesis follows that discipline and leaves the disagreements standing where the evidence in this unit cannot close them.
Machine layer. Every paragraph marked ⚙ is fallible synthesis, including all three Christ readings, all of which are marked novel because no commentator in the brief draws them. The badges above state their own basis; two links are flagged rather than asserted.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)